Unfortunately, their buddies in the media feel differently. They're willing to trip over themselves to try and present things in the most biased way possible.

For example, NBC's Erin McLaughlin all but trips over herself trying to connect bump stocks to three supposed mass shootings over the weekend.

NBC's Erin McLaughlin blames the Supreme Court's decision on bump stocks to 3 mass shootings over the weekend, despite the fact none of the weapons were equipped with them. pic.twitter.com/j5IfEKaEWE

— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) June 17, 2024

Now, McLaughlin does admit that there's no evidence any of these shootings used a bump stock before trying to scaremonger into convincing people they would have been much worse if they had.

That may be, or it's possible that the increased rate of fire would have meant decreased accuracy and fewer people would have been hurt. Yes, Las Vegas had a high body count, but there was more going on than just bump stocks.

Oh, but "experts say" was included. Of course, we know roughly what kind of experts they spoke with or read, and they worked for people like Brady, Giffords, Everytown, and so on. They're not experts, they're shills.

Regardless, this is the epitome of media bias on display.

Report on the shootings, because they're news, is one thing, as is talking about the bump stock decision. Again, news. What we see McLaughlin engage in here, though, is editorializing and it's why trust in the media is in the toilet.

The bump stock played no role, but the story is initially framed as if it did. These shootings would have likely happened no matter what, but the framing here is, "This is the bump stock decision and there were all these shootings this weekend." There is absolutely no attempt at clarifying anything until after the report. That's because by then, the idea is firmly linked in the mind. 

The two literally had nothing to do with one another. There's no legitimate news reason to connect them like that except to editorialize.

Here's the reality, though.

The Michigan shooter used at least one handgun. That means a bump stock wasn't even on the table. While the authorities looking into the other two shootings mentioned haven't released what kind of weapon was used, those were likely handguns as well. Again, no possibility of a bump stock being used because--and I'm sure McLaughlin is unaware of this fact--handguns don't use stocks.

But that was irrelevant to her "reporting" entirely.

All that mattered was trying to link these two things in the minds of viewers so that a renewed push to ban bump stocks could take place in the halls of Congress. There's no way that's going to happen today like it almost did right after Las Vegas, so the media has to gin up enough outrage to push it through.

That means trying to play games like this to manipulate the American public, most of whom aren't really that interested in gun control as a thing these days.

Which is why the media is trying so freaking hard, straining any remaining shreds of credibility to try and make it seem that bump stocks are making us all less safe, even though there weren't a lot of people interested in the things before the ban.

Now, people will buy them because people like those who work at CNN don't want us to have them, but few of those will ever be used in a mass shooting, if any.

It should be noted, though, that full-auto switches are floating around that actually turn guns into machine guns and those keep popping up in criminal hands despite the laws on the books, which the Supreme Court hasn't overturned. Those get used in similar supposed mass shootings--only counted as such by the Gun Violence Archive, it should be noted--and that doesn't even get a mention?

Funny, ain't it?